南洋大学校友业余网站

《生活在欺瞒的年代》
马来西亚八打灵再也发布会

2016年4月2日


2016年4月2日在马来西亚吉隆坡八打灵再也新书发布会现场视频:
https://youtu.be/ZVn_9mtG9bU

相关信息: 《生活在欺瞒的年代》新书发布会


以下是 2016-4-10 《人民论坛》的信息:(前半是译文)

李光耀的故事同时就是“新加坡的故事”
Show Ying Xin 开场白

(按):Ying Xin 小姐是于2016年4月2日在马来西亚八打灵再也举行的傅树介医生新书《生活在欺瞒的年代》发布会的主持人。

“就许多人而言,李光耀的故事同时就是‘新加坡的故事’”这是作为他的回忆录的第一批标题。

这是一个人的标题、国家的第一位总理、把一个小村庄发展成为大都会、摆脱了它从一个发展困境的第三世界国家、让它上升为世界上最富裕的国家之一。

这是新加坡的故事精神和“建国之父”的新加坡。但是,每一个完美的叙述都有它的缺陷和漏洞。

事实上,李光耀的历史已经被引来了质疑的问题。

傅树介医生,今年84岁,他是在公安法令和后来的内部安全法令下被逮捕并监禁17年的政治犯。他揭穿了新加坡官方的历史叙说。

他的回忆录:《生活在欺瞒的年代》于2016年4月2日在八打灵再也的 Gerakbudaya 书局发行了。在发布会上也进行了讨论会。

傅树介医生是50年代马来亚大学(新加坡分校)社会主义俱乐部的发起人。他同时也是和李光耀及林清祥一起是新加坡人民行动党的发起人。林清祥是一名杰出的职工会领袖,他后来在不经审讯下被监禁了。

傅树介医生是来自一个具有显著背景的家族——陈嘉庚,是他的外祖父。他是一个杰出的华侨商人和慈善家。他也是中国福建省厦门大学的创办人。

现在的马来西亚人对陈嘉庚、新加坡和内部安全法令并不熟悉。但是,我们趋向忘记了我们(马来西亚与新加坡)之间的历史的联系在一起的。

傅树介医生的一个失败项目——在1963年反对新加坡与马来亚的合并计划。这个计划的的失败不在于因为李光耀的“马来西亚人的马来西亚”不被马来统治精英所接受,而是李光耀已经在事前策划让它失败。

傅树介医生说,“李光耀在面对着不久前来自左翼选民获得的胜利后,他希望通过这个(与马来亚的)合并,(时任马来亚总理的)东姑能够帮忙他逮捕在新加坡的左翼反对者”。

于1963年,马来西亚成立之前几个月,政治肃清行动党在新加坡开始了。超过100多名主要的左翼领导人在著名的“冷藏行动”计划下被捕了。傅树介医生和包括林清祥在内的前提反对党成员都被捕了。

傅树介医生被监禁了近11年后被释放。接着在1976年再一次被捕。他被“指控积极协助亲共分子”。他在6年后被释放。

傅树介医生和其他社会主义阵线(从人民行动党分裂出来另组的政党)领袖反对合并计划,是因为这个计划不是一个真正为了建设一个国家的愿望而提出的。

傅树介医生补充说,他认为,新加坡的左翼是要一个正真建立一个国家理想的合并。英国人、李光耀和东姑只是为了各自的政治理由而走到一块儿。他们所计划建立的马来西亚并不是一个具有国家的观点的马来西亚。

傅树介医生撰写这本书的目的在于回应官方的所叙述的历史的修正一面;出版这本书的另一个目的是为了他和自己一代的同志。

傅树介医生想李光耀的新加坡历史提出了挑战。他引用近期解密的历史档案资料作为支撑反驳合并计划其实是(挑战李光耀)许多例子中的一个例子。

他在自己的回忆最后一页写道:“我个人感觉到,我有责任和义务必须给年轻一代留下我们国家的历史”

参与本次讨论会的演讲者包括了 Pusat Sejarah Rakyat 主席赛·胡申·阿里——也是本书的共同出版人;李万千,前 Malaysiakini 专栏作者。他们两位都是内部安全法令的受害者;Sunita Mei-Lin Rajakumar 小姐,她是前马来亚雪兰莪州劳工党主席拉惹古玛医生的女儿,也是 Yayasan Usman Awang 信托人的董事局成员。

这本是已经于2016年2月13日在新加坡正式发行,它是目前一本最畅销的书。


Lee Kuan Yew's story is also 'The Singapore Story'
Show Ying Xin

"For many, Lee Kuan Yew's story is also 'The Singapore Story'", as the first instalment of his memoirs is titled.

It is the tale of one man, the country's first premier, transforming a small village into a metropolitan city, extricating a third world country from its development dilemma, to rise to the ranks of the richest countries in the world.

That is the inspirational story of Singapore and of the 'founding father' of Singapore. However, every too-perfect narrative has its flaws and loopholes.

Indeed Lee's side of history has been called into question.

Dr Poh Soo Kai, 84, a political prisoner detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance (PPSO) and its successor the Internal Security Act (ISA) for a total of 17 years, seeks to "debunk the official Singapore historical narrative".

His memoir 'Living in a Time of Deception' was launched yesterday at the Gerakbudaya bookstore, Petaling Jaya, and followed by a panel discussion.

Poh was the founding member of the University Socialist Club at the University of Malaya in the 50s, and also the founding member of the People's Action Party (PAP), along with Lee and Lim Chin Siong – the charismatic trade union leader who would later be detained twice, without any trial.

Poh also has a distinguished family background. The prominent overseas Chinese businessman and philanthropist who founded Xiamen University, Tan Kah Kee, is his grandfather.

Malaysians are not unfamiliar with Tan Kah Kee, Singapore, and the ISA, but we tend to forget the fact that our histories are connected.

Failed project For Poh, the merger of Singapore and Malaya in 1963 was a failed project not because Lee's 'Malaysia for Malaysians' was not accepted by the Malay ruling elite, but because Lee had planned for it to fail.

"Lee was under threat from recent left-wing electoral victories, and his hope was that with the merger (with Malaya), the Tunku would arrest his left-wing opponents in Singapore for him," he claimed.

A few months before the establishment of Malaysia in 1963, political cleansing took place in Singapore which saw over 100 people, mainly leftists, detained in the infamous Operation Coldstore. Poh and many opposition party members, including Lim Chin Siong, were detained.

Poh was only released after nearly 11 years. And he was re-arrested again in 1976 for 'allegedly having actively helped pro-communist elements'. He was freed after six years.

Poh and other Barisan Sosialis (PAP's splinter) leaders opposed the planned merger because it was not out of a genuine desire to build a nation.

"(The) setting up (of) Malaysia had no vision of forming a nation, they (the British, Lee and Tunku) came together for political reasons of their own", he opined, adding that the leftists wanted a merger but with genuine nation-building ideals.

The intention of writing this memoir is to give a revisionist account to the official narrative, and to write for his fellow comrades from his generation.

The merger scheme is just one of many examples where Poh challenges Lee's story of Singapore, backed with the support of recently-released historical documents.

"I feel I owe the younger generation a duty to leave a record of our country's history", he wrote on the last page of his memoir.

Among the panelilsts were Selangor senator Syed Husin Ali, who is also the president of Pusat Sejarah Rakyat – the co-publisher of this book and Lee Ban Chen, former Malaysiakini columnist, both of whom were also victims of ISA; Sunita Mei-Lin Rajakumar, a member of the Board of Trustees of Yayasan Usman Awang, who is also the daughter of former chairperson of the Selangor Labour Party, MK Rajakumar.

The book was first launched in Singapore in February, and is still a best-seller today.


以下是 2016-4-9 《人民论坛》的信息:

另一版本的新加坡故事
李万千

〖注〗:本文是为《傅树介政治斗争回忆录:生活在欺瞒的年代》新书推介仪式(4月2日)准备的发言稿。当天由于时间关系,只采用了部分内容。

《生活在欺瞒的年代》是由傅树介医生撰著,由孔莉莎、黄淑仪联合编辑,而伍德南则将它译成华文,使英、华两种版本能够同时面世。新书一上市,立即获得舆论和市场的良好反应,预示了它的重要性和深远影响。

读过本书的人一定会发现,它的内容不仅是傅医生个人政治斗争回忆录那么简单。正如傅医生在前言中所说的,本书是结合他的亲身经历,全面反映上世纪50年代及60年代所发生的重大事件,目的在于厘清真相,驳斥官方版本的新加坡历史论述。这也是当局警告前政治拘留者不得重写历史后,最直接的答复。

已届84岁高龄的傅医生,在其团队的鼓励和参与下,出色地完成这部重要著作,体现了高度的社会使命感。傅医生最受不了的,是当局竭尽所能,把被释放的前政治拘留者定性为“被打败的破坏分子”。虽然饱受17年黑牢的摧残,他仍然坚守“士可杀,不可辱”的政治操守。李光耀指责他“蔑视不屈”(defiant),他却巍然不动!

敢于“藐视敌人”

傅树介大义凛然地强调:“在‘正义’与‘非正义’之间,我作严格界分,绝不含糊。”正是这种敢于“在战略上藐视敌人”的大无畏精神,支撑着许多像谢太宝和傅树介医生一样的大无畏者,以“坐穿牢底”的决心,战胜敌人的黑牢!

傅医生坚决否认新加坡前左翼政治拘留者是什么“被打败的坏分子”这个反动的伪命题,并以实际行动给予坚决的反击,这是完全正确与必要的。

其实,只要斗争还在继续,暂时的失败并不可怕,因为我们明白人民取得胜利的逻辑是:“斗争,失败,再斗争,再失败,直至胜利。”

社会主义斗争未完

无可否认,新加坡左翼在上世纪50年代及60年代反对英殖民主义,为争取自治和独立,实现人民民主和社会主义的斗争。由于李光耀的伪装、背叛和出卖,以及本身犯上错误,而宣告失败。但从长远来看,这场为实现更美好社会制度的斗争,实际上仍未结束。

不论从新加坡、区域性或者是囯际的视野出发,社会主义和资本主义最终谁胜谁负,或如何发展的问题,毕竟还没有解决。特别是上世纪末以来世界金融危机频频爆发,许多老牌资本主义囯家纷纷出现经济发展的瓶颈,甚至面临破产的窘境;而中囯则快速和平崛起,其他不少发展中囯家的经济成长也相对快速的情况下,更是如此。

有谁会想到,在帝囯主义的老大美囯,会爆发99%的人民向1%大富豪宣战,这等深刻暴露帝囯主义本质的大事件?又有谁会想到,在短短的三几十年内,中囯就能够和平崛起成为世界第二大经济体,而且若按照购买力平价计算,可能已经超越美囯而成为世界第一。

以证据确立可信度

诚如孔莉莎在其导言中所说的:“只有全面透彻呈现证据,才能确立本书的可信度。”她指出本书历史论证的资料,基本上来自三个出处:档案资料,辅以报章的新闻报导、《李光耀回忆录》以及傅医生的人生经验和对世界状况的观察和理解。我认为傅医生在左翼运动中的资深背景、丰富阅历、及广泛的人脉关系,也是本书的一些优势和特色。

以下就举李光耀为例,看看傅医生是如何运用他所掌握的有关资料和证据,来暴露李氏是如何善于把自己伪装为一个支持社会主义的进步律师,暗地里却勾结英殖民主义当局及其忠实的仆从林有福,通过公安法令及内安法令进行大逮捕,背叛和出卖以林清祥为首的公开左派,甚至利用与新加坡马共领袖方壮璧,建立所谓反殖统一战线的关系,以达到全面控制人民行动党,及最终夺取新加坡政权的目的。

李光耀伪装为具有社会主义思想的进步律师,为学生和工人服务,在取得左派的信任之后,就拉拢受英文教育和华文教育的左派精英,与他一道成立人民行动党。

表面上他与人民行动党内的左派团结一致,共同为人民争取新加坡的自治与独立而奋斗。实际上他在暗地里却与英殖民主义当局及它的忠实仆从林有福相互勾结,狼狈为奸,怂恿林有福于1956年9月至10月间,展开一连串的逮捕行动,封闭中学联和多家工会,导致社会动乱。结果共有234人,包括林清祥等主要领导人在内,在公安法令下被捕。

李一手策划大逮捕

1957年8月9日人民行动党举行第四届中央执行委员会选举,结果李光耀的保守派和左翼激进派各有6人中选,李光耀拒绝出任高职,激进派被迫挑大梁。同年8月22日,警方就采取行动逮捕包括5名激进派中委在内的30名工会分子和新闻工作者,为李光耀全面控制人民行动党扫除障碍。

根据傅医生的分析,整个事件很可能就是李光耀一手策划的。李光耀通过在狱中已经投靠他的蒂凡那(Devan Nair),在知知拉惹(TT Rajah) 前往探狱时,通过他指示牢外的吴文斗等第二领导梯队,要他们在林清祥及蒂凡那等人还在牢中时,角逐中委会职位。他们中计后,林有福就援引公安法令将他们一网打尽,协助李光耀夺取行动党的领导权。

英囯档案局报告和警察情报刊物还披露,禁止政治犯参加1959年大选的“反颠覆条款”,也是李光耀的主意,是他敦促英殖民者接纳的。这毒招剥夺了所有在狱中或释放了的政治犯参加大选的权力,为李光耀独裁政权上台制造了良机。

因此,正如傅医生所正确指出的,李光耀说什么“马共若遵循和平宪制途径,在民主体制内运作,或许会有如在印度的印共一样,获准在新的马来亚合法活动”,其实只是虚晃的招数。他的目的在于有机会利用与马共建立的所谓反殖统一战线的假相,使他在镇压党内左派,全面控制党的领导权,及在1959年顺利上台执政等方面,不会遭受到来自党内左派太大的反弹。

早已背叛林清祥

如上所述,李光耀实际上在1956及1957年已经分别动手镇压清祥等第一梯队领导,及设计使吴文斗等第二梯队领导也身陷牢狱,公然背叛左派。

因此,傅医生认为,方壮璧在1958年会见李光耀时,应该已经知道他已经背叛林清祥,因为林清祥在1956年10月被捕时,他的罪状是在群众大会上号召群众 "pahmata"(福建话,意为“打警察”)。而事实正好相反,林清祥是吁请群众 "maipahmata"(不要打警察)。傅医生认为如果方壮璧还不知道这件事,就说明方当时已太过脱离群众了。

在新加坡马共领导人准备与李光耀建立所谓统一战线关系期间,李光耀成功地推行了三件十分关键的计划,即(一)加冷补选;(二)释放林清祥;(三)人民行动党的干部党员制;简述如下:

(一)加冷补选:把底牌翻开在桌面上

李光耀在第一次会见方壮璧时,就要求他安排让工人党的市议员兼工会领袖郑越东辞去加冷区市议会议席,以证明跟他打交道的方壮璧确实是马共的全权代表。

傅医生认为,要搞清楚这件事,根本不必如此大费周章,只要通过他的情报关系或到警察局去查看“通缉”招贴,上面就有方壮璧的照片和名字。无论如何,马共还是满足了李光耀的无理要求。结果人民行动党在补选中胜出,李光耀如愿以偿,但傅医生认为,马共这么做己经把底牌都翻开在桌面上了!

(二)释放林清祥:在要胁下签署声明

就在方李见面的前后,林清祥被政治部调到自由营,与方水双及蒂凡那等人在一起。他们把一份由李光耀授意,蒂凡那起草的声明——《马来亚社会主义的道路》交给林清祥,要求他签名。

他有些保留,因为其他7人在未与他讨论之前都已经签好名了,他有点被迫签名的感觉。无论如何,他还是签了,因为李光耀要胁他们,若不签署声明,他就不会参加1959年大选准备执政,这也意味着他们将继续坐牢。

显然,李光耀企图一面利用新加坡马共领袖的支持,一面分化林清祥的领导团队,以达到他不可告人的目的。李光耀其实不可能会轻易放弃争取执政的机会。在取得政权之后,若林清祥等人还没有放释放,他是无法向人民交代的。

因此,傅医生曾向林清祥指出,签署声明是错误的,他应揭穿李光耀的骗局,而林清祥也接受傅医生的批评。

(三)干部党员制:李光耀绝对控制的体制

傅医生指出:“1958年12月23日,人民行动党常年大会对党章进行了修订,这可能是李光耀跟方壮璧会面所取得的最大收获——他获得保证,党的基层不会对此作出反弹。”

此次修订党章,目的是为了引进干部党员制,一个可让李光耀绝对控制人民行动党的体制。因为在此体制下,只有干部党员才有资格竞选中央执行委员会,而“干部”党员则须由中委会遴选决定。难怪修订案通过后,李光耀会洋洋得意,扬言行动党不会再被人夺权了。傅医生在书中透露,林清祥对干部党员制十分不满,却不能公开抗争,以免和马共闹翻。

批评马共战略思想

对李光耀和新加坡马共领导人的交锋,傅医生毫不客气地认为,马共方面上当了。他感慨地写道:“两个衰弱政党的领导人相会,其中一个是从他所要打击的敌人手中,取得一份留白的全权委托书;另一个是交出了王牌而一无所获。负责新加坡的马共领导人上当了!左翼把这类人当朋友,那还需要敌人吗?”(页124)

傅医生也批评马共的战略思维。他不认同只有“高潮”和“低潮”之分,而在衰弱时潜伏下来,一股脑全力支持李光耀。他长期认为,支持多党派是左翼向前发展的最佳道路,在战略上不应当是高潮和低潮,而是“浑水”——“我们应当尽可能联合许多党派和集团,在尽可能多的共同基础和广泛课题上进行合作”(页158)。

傅医生对新加坡马共领导人的批评无疑是相当尖锐的,但若有事实根据,就事论事,则并无不妥;若有不同看法,也可以进行讨论,无需过于敏感。


以下是 2016-4-7 《人民论坛》的信息:(前半是译文)

真理与激情代替了与谎言欺瞒

(按):于2016年4月2日在吉隆坡八打灵再也举行的傅树介医生新书《生活在欺瞒年代》发布会上,赛·胡申阿里是其中的一名受邀发言的嘉宾。以下是他的演讲稿。

赛·胡申阿里获取了马来亚大学(新加坡分校)学士和硕士学位。他的博士学位是在伦敦经济与政治学院获得的。他是前马来亚大学(吉隆坡)的人类学和社会学的教授。目前他说马来西亚人民公正党(Parti Keadilan Rakyat, PKR) 副主席。他的著作有:《马来亚农民社会和它的领导层》(Malay Peasant Society And Leadership (1975));《双面:不经审讯(1996年)》(Two Faces: Detention Without Trial (1996));《种族关系在马来西亚:和谐与冲突(2008)》(Ethnic Relations in Malaysia: Harmony and Conflict (2008)) 和《马来人:他们的问题和未来(2008)》(The Malays: Their Problems and Future (2008))。

我很荣幸受邀在今天早上参与了傅树介医生的新书《生活在欺瞒的年代》的发布会。我在三天内读完了这本书。一旦我开始阅读,我就不会放下了。我发现这是一本具有特殊意义的伟大历史和价值性很高的著作。傅树介医生是一名杰出的政治人物。在内部安全法令下,他在李光耀的牢里度过了17年。

尽管这本书一直被视为是傅树介医生的个人回忆录,但是对他个人的生涯和经历着墨不多。事实就是这样。只是一本精心的杰作和有关替代新加坡的及完整的文件。它根据事实证据,这些证据是附上注释和令人信服的否定了李光耀本人和就像丹尼斯·布拉德沃斯(Denis Bloodworth) 似的胡扯谎言。

树介在他的书里写了个各样的东西。在这本书的最后一章,他连贯了自己与挚友们(包括惹耶古玛医生)之间讨论的许多不同课题。尽管他并没有直接说明。我可以肯定他们之间是商量过共同撰写一本有关新加坡的历史。我曾经几次要求惹耶古玛医生纂写有关新加坡的历史,特别是在李光耀统治时期。但是,他一直说自己已经忘记了其中许多事情,和需要树介的帮忙。因为他个人认为树介对有关事件的记得很清楚。

我知道他们之间是曾经讨论过这件事。但是,在他们准备开始撰写时,拉惹古玛逝世了。我也听说树介及拉惹古玛的亲密好友林福寿医生,在朋友的劝说下撰写自己的回忆录。同样的,他在极其困难的情况下要开始撰写工作时也逝世了。

这三名医生在政治上的亲密关系是从他们青年学生时代在马来亚大学建立起来的。当时马来亚大学是坐落在新加坡。事实上,他们在李光耀影响下紧密地涉入新加坡的政治发展。但是,差不多也在这个时候,这三个杰出的医生已经察觉到,事实上李光耀是不可以信任的。

他们说,李光耀就是近乎是一个骗子。他事实上并不是一个社会主义信仰者,但是,他自称是信仰社会主义。他的观点和行为已经说明他根本就不是什么民主人士。他们也是其中一分子怀疑李光耀和英国殖民主义者之间的关系。这三名医生与年轻和具有魅力的林清祥关系密切。林清祥是领导进步职工会的领导者。林清祥与李光耀之间的合作从人民行动党创立时开始的。但是,最终李光耀背叛了他。他被李光耀关进了监牢,在政治上被李光耀所暗算了。

在拉惹古玛和福寿逝世后,这个艰巨的包袱就落在了树介肩膀上了。他的任务就是撰写出一部完整的新加坡历史。事实上,树介早已经开始这方面的工作了。早在1993年到1994年之间,也就是他第二次被捕监禁6年释放后,树介在他移民到加拿大的途中,在英国伦敦逗留时,他在英国的莎翁公园(Kew Gardens) 的档案馆开始进行调查研究工作了。

在那儿,他阅读和收集了所有翻阅的资料,同时也记录下所有相关的资料。他把这些记录下的笔记资料也与拉惹古玛和福寿分享。毫无疑问,这些资料对于他后来撰写这部巨著是起着极其重大的作用的。树介并没有立即开始撰写。我置信,他是因为自己的两名战友的逝世激发了他的纂写工作。

在这期间,陈仁贵,他是一名律师。早期是马来亚大学社会主义俱乐部的主席。他与树介一样计划完成一部有关社会主义俱乐部的著作。在本书以《花惹风云与李光耀时代》为名于2009年出版了。《花惹》(马来文译为“黎明”)是一份马来亚大学社会主义俱乐部的月刊。由于后来陈仁贵的视觉逐渐退化后,他不仅是向树介索取集辑的长篇文章,而且成功的说服了他成为共同的编辑。早些时候,他准备出版一本纪念林清祥的书籍。这本书的名字为:《天空中的一颗彗星:林清祥的历史》。树介并没有参与。但是,后来他参与了编辑工作。他在这本书修订本写了一篇序言。

树介和仁贵也共同编辑了《新加坡1963年冷藏行动50周年纪念》这本书。这本书是为了纪念50年前超过100名左翼的主要政治人物和工会分子遭受大规模的被被捕和长期监禁的事件。这些人是在反对李光耀推动新加坡加入马来亚的假全民投票后被捕。这本书包括了叙述和分析了一些被捕者的经验。这本书也附录了自1948年紧急法令以来被捕者的名单。这本书是在仁贵逝世后两年出版的。

晚些时候,树介为《新曼德拉》(New Mandala) 杂志撰写了一些文章。他的这些文章是反驳新加坡驻澳大利亚最高专员的。文章暴露了在李光耀政权的统治下新加坡政府已经公然承诺的一些政治欺瞒。我敢说,这些文章,包括他早期协助编辑那些书籍时的供稿,除了为他提供所需的实践之外,更重要的是给他决心来完成这本书。

但是具有讽刺意义的是,树介对此没有信心以为他能够取得这将成为自己生命中的理想。尽管如此,正如他自己承认的,他的编辑团队和一些朋友给予他提供了很大的帮助。他的一位最接近的朋友看着这本书出版过程中的每一个阶段的进展,坦率的说,如果没有其中一名编辑孔丽莎博士的协助,这本书无法看到今天面世的光景。

孔丽莎博士不仅仅是编辑树介撰写的文章,同时,以学术资料作为支持这些文章以及为文章提供无数注脚。这一切有助于丰富了树介早些时候在莎翁园(英国档案馆)所收集的资料。但是,我可以肯定,孔丽莎博士将是第一位知道《生活在欺瞒年代》的确是树介个人不懈努力的结果。这本书最重要的内容是建立在树介个人在新加坡的回忆、观察事物和分析当时的时局。当然,孔丽莎博士和其他人也协助树介对文章进行修饰。

正如我早些时候所说的,树介并没有在这本书里着重于撰写有关他个人的事。事实上,他也确实明显的回避这方面的问题。他撰写有关自己的事的那部分只是在第8章:《我和医疗》。在这一章里,他叙述了有关他介绍了有关作为一个实习医生进行手术工作的经验。后来他在2名著名外科医生,一名是外国人,另一名是本地医生的指导下成为了初级医生。这说明他是热爱自己的专业的,为了自己能够参与政治活动他不得不放弃自己所热爱的专业。

在这本书的第一页的第一章是《家庭关系》。我想,他会撰写关于自己以及特别是自己家族的核心关系。相反地,他却全部撰写有关他的外祖父陈嘉庚的光辉事迹。这是因为树介被捕的其中一条罪状的映射他外祖父是一个共产党员,他与“红色中国”政府有联系。事实上,这是一个极其莫名其妙的指责。后来,当新加坡政府反过来在行动上颂扬陈嘉庚时,他们对树介的这项指控却从来被没有收回。

李光耀摆脱不了的最大痴念就是尽力的维持自己的独裁政权。他不能或者无法容忍任何批评或者反对他的人。他经常把这些批评或者反对他的人视为罪状首要推翻他。他经常指责他反对者是共产党员或者是亲共分子。还有其他的指责是涉及马来亚民族解放阵线(MNLF) 活动和欧洲共产党企图颠覆政府,或者被指控是马克思阴谋和其他等等。李光耀就是在这些籍口下引用内部安全法令逮捕和监禁他的反对者。这些被捕者监禁的时间相当得长。

在马来西亚,据我所知,在内部安全法令下被监禁最长时间的政治拘留者是15年。但是在新加坡超过这样长(15年)的时间的政治拘留者是极其普通的事。树介、赛·查哈利被监禁了17年,林福寿医生是20年。还有其他更多的人。如谢太宝是不经审讯超过27年,他比南非的曼德拉被监禁的时间还要来得长。谢太宝是世界上有良知犯人被监禁最长时间的。

总的来说,就我所知只有文莱人民党的政治犯被监禁的时间与新加坡的政治犯一样长。特别是在李光耀的统治下。在精神上和肉体上折磨撰写政治犯已经是极其普通的了。在新加坡比这些还有过之而不及,这包括了通过医药上虐待而导致加重了对政治犯的痛苦。

林清祥说过,在给他服食了过量的某种药物后使他产生抑郁症后导致他要自杀。另一方面,树介对于他严重[鼻窦症]的否认或拖延到某个程度也受到过这样的对待和药物,结果造成了的脑死一个短暂时间。请您注意看看树介——他是从死亡边缘走回来的!但是,他今年是84岁了,他看去还是一个年轻人和决心为正义而战和反对世界上各种的被压迫现象,特别是新加坡。

他为此进行斗争的方式就是写作。他在《生活在欺瞒年代》这本书里展现了自己。他通过引用从莎翁殖民地办公室事实的资料、新加坡国会议事记录、剪报和自己整理和时事分析等资料撰写出一本完整和具有挑战性的新加坡历史的另一面。

他已经足以揭穿和暴露李光耀这些年来可以如何通过使用诡计和欺瞒的手段以生存的专制统治。我不想在这里列举这些事实了。因为孔丽莎博士已经这本书的导言里简述了。我建议你们不要按照书本的循序阅读;先把这本书全部读完,然后,再去读孔丽莎博士的导言。我个人认为,这样将有助于[你们],也是有助于我抓住树介的这本巨著的全部含义和意义的核心。

正如前面所说,树介已经贡献和共同与仁贵在2011年一起编辑出版的《花惹年代》(Qwee the Fajar Generation) 和在2013年出版的《新加坡1963年冷藏行动50周年纪念》(The 1963 Operation Cold Store)。他也同时在2015年出版了《天空中彗星》(Comet in Our Sky)。除此之外,他也出版了其他的著作,如在2009年出版的《我们的思想是自由的,诗歌和散文在监牢和驱逐》(Our Thoughts Are Free, Poems and Prose on Imprisonment and Exile)、2010年出版的《蓝色栅门外:一个政治犯的回忆录》(the Blue Gate: Recollection of a Political Prisoner)、2010年出版的《五一三年代:1950年代的华校中学生运动和新加坡政治》(The May 13 Generation: The Chinese Middle School Student Movement and Singapore Politics in the 1950s)。

树介把这些著作称为挑战性历史。在李光耀的统治下大多数新加坡人,特别是政治拘留者已经被迫使噤声了一个很长的时期了。他们出版的书籍做出了明确的反驳。现在人们已经开始说话了。这些书籍的出版赋予了人们勇气和力量。它们为新加坡的政治历史还提供了另一个视角,更真实的观点。

在傅树介的著作《生活在欺瞒的年代》的出版后,在新加坡的反抗史的写作可以说已经达到了顶峰。这本书与其他上述所说的书籍有助于打开了解新加坡人民历史另一面的真实的事实。事实与激情的时代已经到来了,它将替代昔日的独裁者李光耀罪恶多端的诡计与欺瞒。


Truth and inspiration replacing deceit and deception

Noted:Syed Husin Ali was one of the speaker at the launch of "Living in a Time of Deception" on 2 April 2016 at Gerak Budaya in Petaling Jaya. This is the transcript of his speech.

Syed Husin Ali obtained his BA and MA from the University of Malaya (Singapore) and his PhD from the London School of Economics and Political Science. He was a former professor of anthropology and sociology at the University of Malaya (Kuala Lumpur). He is currently the deputy president of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR). He is the author of numerous books including Malay Peasant Society And Leadership (1975), Two Faces: Detention Without Trial (1996), Ethnic Relations in Malaysia: Harmony and Conflict (2008) and The Malays: Their Problems and Future (2008)

I am very honoured for being invited this morning to launch the book Living in a Time of Deception by Poh Soo Kai. I finished reading this book in three days. Once I started, I could not put it down. I found it to be an exceptional work of great historical significance and value. Dr Poh Soo Kai is an outstanding political figure who survived courageously 17 years of severe confinement, in several of Lee Kuan Yew's prisons, under the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA).

Although this book is often referred to as Poh Soo Kai's memoir, it does not concentrate mainly on his personal life and experiences. Indeed it is much more than that. It is a meticulously written and well-documented alternative history of Singapore. It presents factual evidences which are well-annotated and convincingly negate the lies and deceptions of the so-called Singapore story perpetrated by the writings of the Prime Minister himself and his hacks, the like of which was Denis Bloodworth.

Soo Kai writes about all kinds of thing in his book. In the last chapter he relates about discussion on different types of subject he had with his bosom friend, Dr Rajakumar. Although he does not mention it, I am sure they had discussed about writing together a history of Singapore. I had several times urged Rajakumar to write a history of Singapore, especially under Lee Kuan Yew. But he kept on saying he had forgotten many things and would need the help of Soo Kai, whom he considered to have very good memory of events.

I know that for a while both of them did talk about this project. But before they could start writing, Rajakumar passed away. I also heard that Dr Lim Hock Siew, who was also very close to Rajakumar and Soo Kai, was finally persuaded by friends to write up his memoir. But before he had hardly begun, Hock Siew too passed on.

These three doctors, who became close political associates from their young student days in the University of Malaya, which was situated in Singapore then, followed closely, in fact, involved themselves intimately with the development of Singapore politics under Lee Kuan Yew. But almost right from the beginning, this brilliant threesome had already sensed that Kuan Yew could not and, in fact, should not be trusted.

They saw Kuan Yew as almost a fraud; he was not a socialist as he claimed to be, and he was not at all democratic in his views and practices. There are also some who suspected the nature of his relationship with the British colonialists. The three young doctors were closer to the youthful and charismatic Lim Chin Siong, as well as the progressive trade union movement that he led. Chin Siong cooperated with Kuan Yew at the beginning of the PAP days, but he was later betrayed, imprisoned and politically assassinated by the prime minister.

With the demise of Rajakumar and Hock Siew, the burden fell on Soo Kai to undertake the task of completing an alternative Singapore story. Actually, Soo Kai had begun earlier than that. In about 1993-94, some time after his release from second period of six year detention, Soo Kai was on his way to migrate to Canada. He stopped in London to do research in the Colonial Records Office at Kew Gardens.

There he studied and collected documents that had been opened, and jotted down notes that he shared, among others, with Rajakumar and Hock Siew. There is no doubt all these helped him a great deal when writing his magnus opus later. Soo Kai did not write immediately, but I have no doubt that the death of his two great friends spurred him on.

Meanwhile, Tan Jing Qwee, a lawyer who had been President of the University Socialist Club, like Soo Kai, was planning to compile a book on the club. This was published in 2009 under the title of Fajar Generation. Fajar (the Malay word for Dawn) was of course the monthly that the Club produced. Jing Qwee, who was then getting blind, not only managed to get a long essay for the volume from Soo Kai, but also succeeded to persuade him to be joint editor. Earlier, when Jing Qwee was preparing a memorial volume on Lim Chin Siong, under the title of Comet in our Sky: Lin Chin Siong in History, Soo Kai did not participate. But later he edited, with an introduction, a revised edition of the book.

Soo Kai and Jing Qwee also jointly edited The 1963 Operation Cold Store in Singapore. This was to mark the 50th anniversary of mass arrests and long detentions of more than a hundred mainly left wing politicians and trade unionists not long after the phony referendum that was engineered by PM Lee Kuan Yew for the merger of Singapore with Malaya. This book contains narrations and analyses of experiences of some of the detainees and a full list of political detainees since the Emergency in 1948. It was published in 2003 about two years after Jing Qwees’s death.

Much later Soo Kai wrote a couple of articles for the journal New Mandala, where he debated with the Singapore High Commissioner in Australia, and exposed several political deceptions that the Singapore government had blatantly committed under Kuan Yew's authoritarian regime. I dare say that these articles, together with those he contributed to the books he helped to co-edit earlier, provided him with the necessary practice, and more importantly, the determination to complete his book.

But ironically, Soo Kai was not fully confident that he would be able to achieve what had become his life's ambition. Nevertheless, as he openly admits, his editors and some other friends provided him with great help. A very close friend of Soo Kai who practically saw almost every stage in the development of the book, candidly told me that without the help Dr Hong Lysa, one of the editors, the book might not have seen the light of day in its present form.

Lysa not only edited what Soo Kai wrote but also buttressed them with academic research materials and also numerous foot-notes, which enriched those notes that Soo Kai had much earlier gathered in Kew Gardens. But I am sure that Lysa would be the first person to acknowledge that Living in a Time of Deception is indeed the result of Soo Kai's own tireless effort. The main content of this book is based on Soo Kai's memory, observation and analyses of the time that he lived in Singapore. Lysa and the others of course helped to refine it.

I mentioned earlier that in this book Soo Kai did not concentrate on writing about himself, in fact, he appeared to avoid doing this. The closest that he came to writing about himself is in Chapter 8, entitled Medicine and Me. Here he describes his experiences undertaking operations as a houseman and later a junior doctor under two well-known surgeons, a foreigner and a local. It shows his love for the profession, which he had to give up owning to his involvement in politics.

The first chapter of this book is entitled Family Ties. I thought he would write about himself and his relationship particularly with his nuclear family. Instead, he writes almost entirely about his illustrious grandfather, Tan Kah Kee. This is all because one of Soo Kai's allegations for detention implied that his grandfather was a communist by association with the government of "Red China". This is indeed a very cheap allegation. Much later when the Singapore government turned around and practically honoured Tan Kah Kee, this allegation against Soo Kai was never removed.

Lee Kuan Yew's greatest obsession was to preserve his dictatorial regime. He could not and did not tolerate any criticism or opposition, which he believed were often aimed at toppling him. He always accused his opponents as being communists or pro-communists. There were also other variations, such as involvement with the Malayan National Liberation Front (MNLF) activities and with Euro-communists to undermine the government, or being members of a Marxist conspiracy and so forth. With these accusations Kuan Yew easily used the Internal Security Act (ISA) to arrest and imprison his opponents. The periods of imprisonment have been very long for them.

In Malaysia, to my knowledge, the longest a person had been detained under the ISA was for 15 years. But in Singapore it is common for political detention to go beyond this length of time. Soo Kai, like Said Zahari, was incarcerated for 17 years and Dr Lim Hock Siew for 20 years. There were many more. Chia Thye Poh who was detained without trial for about 27 years, suffered much longer than President Mandela. He is one of the longest prisoners of conscience in the world. What is my six years by comparison?

Collectively I know of only Parti Rakyat political prisoners in Brunei who have been incarcerated as long as the political prisoners in Singapore, especially under Lee Kuan Yew. The stories of physical and mental tortures are common among political prisoners. In Singapore, in addition to these, there are also tales of medical mistreatment that have led to additional sufferings of ailing detainees.

Lim Chin Siong was said to have been given overdose of a certain type of drug for his depression that it caused him to become suicidal. Soo Kai, on the other hand, had the treatment and medication for his severe sinus denied or delayed to the extent that it resulted in him being brain dead for a short while. Look carefully at Soo Kai; he came back almost from the dead! But at his age of 84 years now, he is still a young, strong and determined to fight for justice and against oppression the world over, especially in Singapore.

One of the ways he does this is through writing. He has demonstrated this by his book Living In a Time of Deception. By using factual records from the Colonial Office, Hansard of Singapore Parliament, newspaper cuttings and his own recollections and analyses of the time, Soo Kai has been able to write a comprehensive and challenging alternative history of Singapore.

He has been able to uncover and expose the deceits and deception of Lee Kuan Yew to survive his years of authoritarian rule. I do not wish to enumerate all these here. They have been summarised well by Lysa in her introduction to the book. I suggest that you read fully the book first and then revert to the Introduction, and not go according to the sequence of the book. The introduction, I think, will help you, as it had helped me, to grasp the full meaning and significance of Soo Kai's great work.

As I explained earlier, Soo Kai had contributed to and co-edited with Jing Qwee the Fajar Generation (2011) and The 1963 Operation Cold Store (2013). He also published a new edition Comet in Our Sky (2015). Besides these there are also other works such as Our Thoughts Are Free, Poems and Prose on Imprisonment and Exile (2009), Beyond the Blue Gate: Recollection of a Political Prisoner (2010) and The May 13 Generation: The Chinese Middle School Student Movement and Singapore Politics in the 1950s (2011).

Soo Kai called these writings defiant history. They defied Kuan Yew's regime under which most Singaporeans, especially ex-detainees, have been forced into silence for a long time. The people have now spoken. These works have given many of them new courage and strength. They have also provided another perspective, a more truthful perspective, to Singapore's political history.

With the publication of Poh Soo Kai's Living in a Time of Deception, the writing of defiant history in Singapore can be said to have reached its zenith. This book together with those mentioned above, have helped to open the window to understanding the true facts on the alternative people's history of Singapore. The time of truth and inspiration has arrived, to replace the deceit and deception perpetrated by Sir Harry Lee Kuan Yew, the erstwhile dictator of Singapore.


以下是 2016-4-5 《人民论坛》的信息:

傅树介医生于2016年4月2日在马来西亚八打灵再也
举行新书《生活在欺瞒的年代》发布会讲话

主持人,朋友们和同志们,

我在此感激各位出席我的历史回忆录新书:《生活在欺瞒的年代》的发布会。

在今年2月13日,这本书在新加坡举行发布会时,我们在克服许多困难后才寻获新书发布会的地点。

新加坡医药协会无理的拒绝我申请在这个会所举行新书发布会——我是一名医生和在当地大学毕业的学生。在“技术”关系上,我申请租赁医药协会会所为自己的回忆录举行新书发布会是理所当然的,因为我应该被视为是医药协会的“老校友”。

接着,当我们尝试向新加坡中华总商会申请租赁嘉庚堂举行新书发布会地点时,我们的申请又被拒绝了。在新加坡医药协会拒绝了我的申请租赁后,还有哪些地点是适合于这本书举行新书发布会的呢?因为是陈嘉庚的外孙,最适合的地点就是在中华总商会的嘉庚堂。

我们终于在2016年2月13日找到了在新加坡假日酒店举行新书发布会。犹有甚者我们租赁金是相对的低廉的。但是,我们并不把获得举办的地点视为幸运或者吉利的。

但是出席在这次新书发布会的反应是极其良好和热烈的!

在新书发布会举行后的整整一个月,新加坡的主流媒体海峡时报终于决定评述这本书了。它称赞了这本书。它给予了客观的非敌对的评论。这是受到我们尊敬的。我们并为此感到特别的高兴。因为正如我在大约1954年出版的《花惹》季刊所说的,海峡时报给予的吻是一个“死亡的吻”。我现在必须很小心这种被选择起来的共同合作。

尽管如此,今天我的这本在新加坡已经成为最畅销的书。

☆   ☆   ☆

但是那些对新加坡的历史不是那么感兴趣的马来西亚人,我今天要向出席这个发布会在座的各位,讲述有关新加坡加入马来西亚和随后又退出马来西亚的这一阶段的历史。

为什么英国人在1963年要推动马来亚半岛和新加坡岛的合并是整个问题的核心,这是他们为了确保有效地使用在新加坡的军事基地。

在二次世界大战之后,英国人面对着经济紧缩资金匮乏和无法为此散布在世界各地的军事基地情况下,他们仍然决意要保留新加坡这个军事基地在自己的控制下。

在二次世界大战结束后,他们立即炮制了一个不包括新加坡在内的马来亚联邦。他们把新加坡仅仅的控制在自己的手里。这一点我们可以从麦克迈克尔条约(MacMichael Treaty) 里所阐述的观点看得到。在马来亚半岛和新加坡的人民反对英国人的这一决定,他们在1947年10月20日爆发了一场席卷全马和新加坡的罢市、罢工、罢课的运动(Hartal movement),要求实现一个统一和进步的马来亚。他们的这一诉求被英国人拒绝了。

英国人之所以要把新加坡的军事基地控制在这个地区,是因为风起云涌的反殖民地运动席卷了整个远东地区,而导致毛泽东在中国的政权和苏卡诺在印度尼西亚取得了政权。这是在亚洲是拥有最多的人口的两个国家。这对于在二次战后野心勃勃的英帝国主义者来说是一个极其明显的威胁。因为英国人在新加坡的军事基地是整个问题的核心。

英国的档案资料披露了,英国人在远东区其中的一个战略目标是“为此一个独立的瞄准中国的核子武器”。为此,在1961年,英国人在新加坡的军事就已经建立以核武设备工厂使之有能力肩负起对准这个的目标。与此同时,英国人采取了更加积极的立场去推翻印尼的苏卡诺政府。

新加坡军事基地扮演的积极角色就是有利于英国人调动军队维护去镇压在1962年的文莱军事起义。

但是,当英国人看到了芳林区与安顺区的补选左翼取得胜利,这意味是1961年新加坡的左翼力量开始复苏。为此,它们对在新加坡的英国军事基地是否继续发挥其作用已经无法确定了。正如他们自己形容的这是:“敌对的当地居民”。

在1961年,李光耀政府似乎无法抵挡广泛的左翼力量号召争取独立和拥有内部安全。新加坡作为一个英国的军事基地,仍然需要评估其扮演在区域里对付中国和印尼角色,它必须在不同的安排下获得保护。

因此,英国人从纸箱里拿出了马来西亚合并的建议。让这个计划给了一个除尘,并让它进入快速车道上。英国人驻新加坡的最高专员薛尔克爵士(Lord Selkirk) 非常清晰地说,新加坡加入马来西亚联邦计划是一个不可商量的条件的新政治实体。

就马来亚东姑而言,他对一个“左翼的华人居多”的新加坡并不感兴趣。英国人必须用北婆罗洲的领土,也就是现在的沙巴和砂拉越成为马来西亚的一部分作为诱饵说服他同意。

就李光耀而言,左翼在不久前通过选举(即芳林区和安顺区补选)所取得的胜利的压力下,他希望通过合并,东姑将会为他逮捕在新加坡的左翼反对派。

但是,东姑厌恶李光耀这种想法,并不愿意这么做。最终,于1963年2月2日进行的冷藏行动是在英国、马来亚和新加坡三方共同负责下摧毁了新加坡的左翼运动。

到了这里,我们可以看到在涉及成立马来西亚的问题上三方并未有为了一个国家的共同看法与意愿,而是纠集在一起完全就是为了各自的目的吧了。

在新加坡加入马来西亚后,李光耀就寻求要取代东姑在联合政府的华人伙伴陈修信和马华公会。明显的,李光耀并不是反对一个马来西亚的共同理想和原则。但是,当无法说服东姑抛弃陈修信时,他决定将通过参加在1964年举行的马来西亚全国大选向东姑证明,他可以号召并获得比马华国会更多的华人支持。他向东姑保证将参与紧接着合并后即将来临的大选。李光耀食言了。让李光耀惊愕的是,在1964年的大选结果是惨败。他只在派出的5名候选中赢得1席。李光耀在马来西亚是凝视着一片凄凉暗淡的未来。

面对着这个迷茫的前途,李光耀是时与时任英国驻新加坡最高专员公署 PBC 墨里[交谈]。他告诉墨里,假设他在马来西亚无法立足,那么,马来西亚的成功几率将会是渺茫的。

薛尔克勋爵以敏锐观察力察觉到:最终李光耀在马来西亚将借助于种族主义政治,并企图和预期马来西亚巫统将会报复,接着(政治主义政治)将在这个社会蔓延开来。这就是导致1964年在新加坡发生的暴动。

于1964年12月,在这个不愉快的国家发生了这件事。东姑写信给李光耀建议,他们之间需要讨论有关在宪法上重新划定两个地区(指马来亚半岛与新加坡之间)的界线,这样就不需要把新加坡划分出去管理。英国人迅速改变了继续需要在新加坡的基地,然而,[如果]不是为了干预事件,东姑已经失去了权利与李光耀讨论如何有关在宪法上重新安排划定地区的建议了。

第一次干预事件是于1964年12月。中国成功试爆了第一颗原子弹。接着,新加坡的军事基地存在的目的是要通过核威慑遏制中国就成摆设了

第二次干预事件上述有关苏卡诺即将到来的失败。于1964年12月,英国人相对的有信心他们在印尼的阴谋将会得逞,这将导致苏卡诺政权的下台。在1965年正月,苏卡诺本身已经在自己的演讲中预感到,“今年是一个危险的一年”。苏卡诺政权终于无法为此到1965年。从这2个因素分析,英国人使用在新加坡的军事基地有利意义已经消失了。英国人向东姑同意让东姑与李光耀之间展开探讨有关重新安排有关马来亚与新加坡之间的问题。这是发生在大约1964年末到1965年初之间的事。

在这个阶段仍然是在探讨有关东姑继续掌握着国防及外交的课题,只有部分自治的形式给予新加坡。无论如何,于1965年7月,当苏卡诺的下台已经不可逆转了,新加坡从马来西亚分割出去——这个有利于李光耀的选择已经在敦拉萨与吴庆瑞之间谈判中开始提出来了。

为了加速有关(新加坡从马来西亚)分离谈判,行动党于1965年5月举行了马来西亚人团结大会。值得注意的是,马来亚的左翼拒绝了邀请参与这个所谓的“马来西亚人团结”大会。

在“马来西亚人的马来西亚”的这个据称是中性的口号掩饰下,这个集会充满了反马来人的路线。这是导致马来人社区与华人社区之间的关系紧张。为了避免未来社区暴力事件的发生,在1965年8月终于(新加坡从马来西亚)分离了!——李光耀和吴庆瑞的愿望终于实现了。但是,李光耀还在电视机前流着鳄鱼的眼泪!

这是个意外的惊喜。对于英国帝国主义在策划下苏卡诺于1965年9月的倒台(简称“930政变”)(我将不会在这里进入)而言似乎是惊呆了。总的来说,英国人继续保留新加坡作为一个军事基地已经没有意义了。

马来西亚的成立不是因为具有任何真正的愿望要建立一个包括马来亚、新加坡、北婆罗洲(即砂拉越和沙巴在内)的国家。它的真正目的仅仅为了保护英国人在新加坡的军事基地。一旦这个使用新加坡军事基地目的已经失去作用了,英国人就整装回国了。

不幸在这个过程中行动党玩弄了制造社区紧张的两面手段的伎俩——通过马来西亚的团结以及马来西亚人的马来西亚口号煽动华人和马来人沙文主义。这个言行已经加剧长堤两岸社区的紧张关系。(长堤两岸)友好的兄弟关系变成了敌意。今天马来亚和新加坡之间的分离关系比起1962年更加疏远了。

☆   ☆   ☆

我将在此结束我讲话。或许,我说一下书里谈到有关统一战线策略的优势问题

我在书里传递了有关任何统一战线策略是错误和有欠理想的印象。我对于在1950年代和1960年代早期之间有关作用于行动党之间的统一战线提出强烈的批评。

这可能与事实是不一致的。我支持有限度的统一战线的策略。对于一个进步的政党而言,这是一个具有根本的意义的。这它扩大其成员和选票的途径。这是一个对任何一个进步力量扩大影响力的工具。

我批评余柱业和方壮璧并不是在于那个时候新加坡的历史上是否需要一个统一战线。我的批评是在基于如何建立统一战线。事实上,我并不考虑过有关方壮璧与李光耀之间统一战线,那是因为他的统一战线是违反了统一战线的基本原则的。

统一战线的产生是必须建立在所有成员一个共同的平台的基础上。当其中的一个(统一战线的)成员背叛了共同的基础、或者攻击、或者削弱其他成员时,最终是享有保护和由此导致内部的斗争去维护这个共同的承诺的平台。只有在这个基础上,人们才会被教育去维护这个共同平台和辨别真正为了人民利益的成员和隐藏在统一战线的那些机会主义者。

但是,余柱业和方壮璧所建立的统一战线并不是遵循这些原则。在1959年,当行动党在公安法令下逮捕学生活动分子时,他们或者左翼并没有站出来表达抗议。

当李光耀没有实现承诺,在1959年取得选举胜利后释放所有政治犯时,他们还是没有提出抗议。

当左翼号召废除公安法令时,李光耀不但没有接受而是通过成立一个毫无实权的咨询委员会取代和废除检讨制度,以便更加严厉实施公安法令,他们还是没有提出反对。

当李光耀禁止林清祥在芳林区补选上台演讲是一个明显要削弱他的影响力时,他们仍然没有提出任何的反对。

同样的情况发生在1961年。当出台限制职工会活动的法律通过时,他们仍然还是没有提出反对。

这一切说明,这并不是统一战线而是把整体出卖。新加坡的左翼运动已经从中吸取了惨痛的经验教训。但是,一朝被蛇咬、十年怕麻绳并不是一个选择。


Dr. Poh's speech in book launch
in Petaling Jaya,Malaysia on 2 April 2016 

Mr Chairman or Madam Chairwoman, friends and comrades,

I wish to thank all of you here for coming to attend this book launch in Petaling Jaya of my historical memoir, "Living in a Time of Deception."

This memoir was launched earlier this year on 13 February in Singapore. We encountered many difficulties in securing a venue for it.

The Singapore Medical Alumni unceremoniously denied me – a doctor and a local graduate ie technically an "old boy" of the Medical Alumni – the use of its hall to launch my memoir.

Then we were rebuffed by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry when we tried to book the Tan KahKee Auditorium. After the rejection by the Medical Alumni, what venue would be more befitting for this book launch than the Tan KahKee Auditorium for I am, after all, Tan KahKee's grandson.

Finally we managed to launch the book in a Singapore hotel on 13 February. Moreover, we got a cheap rate as the 13th was not considered auspicious or lucky.

But the reception to the book has been good and encouraging!

Exactly one month after its launch, the mainstream newspaper in Singapore, The Straits Times, finally decided to review the book. To its credit, it gave an objective non-hostile review. This makes us respectable! I am not particularly happy because I have said in a Fajar journal around 1954 that the kiss of The Straits Times is the "kiss of death". I should now be very wary about being co-opted by the establishment.

Nevertheless, I am pleased that the book is a best seller in Singapore today.

*   *   *

But for my audience today in Malaysia, who are not so interested in Singapore history, I want to talk about the period when Singapore came into Malaysia and the subsequent separation.

The cardinal reason why the British engineered the merger of peninsula Malaya and island Singapore in 1963 was to safeguard the effective use of their military base in Singapore.

After the 2nd World War, the British government was short of cash and unable to maintain most of their military bases scattered around the world, yet it was determined to keep the Singapore military base under its direct control.

This was manifestly clear from the MacMichael Treaty, immediately post 2nd World War, which created the Malayan Union that excluded Singapore, leaving it in British hands. The opposition of the people in mainland Malaya and island Singapore towards this Malayan Union scheme, as embodied in the nationwide Hartal movement of 20 October 1947 for a unified and progressive Malaya, was completely ignored by the British.

Britain needed to keep the Singapore military base in this region because the spectacular rise of the anti-colonial movement in the Far East had brought Mao Tse Tung to power in China and Sukarno in Indonesia – the two most populous countries of the region. The threat, posed by China and Indonesia to Britain's imperialist ambitions in the aftermath of World War II, was palpable. Hence, the British military base in Singapore was essential.

The British archive revealed that one of UK strategic aims in the Far East was to "maintain an independent contribution to the nuclear deterrent against China." Therefore, by 1961, Britain had stationed planes, capable of carrying nuclear bombs aimed at China, in its Singapore military base. In the same vein, Britain adopted a very pro-active stance towards Indonesia to topple Sukarno.

The effectiveness of the Singapore base in advancing British interests was certainly demonstrated in the role it played in dispatching troops to squash the Brunei rebellion in December 1962.

However, with the resurgence of the left-wing in Singapore in 1961 as seen in the electoral victories in Hong Lim and Anson, Britain was not at all assured that its military base in Singapore would be effective in what the British referred to as "a sea of hostile local population".

In 1961, Lee Kuan Yew's government seemed unable to resist the popular left-wing forces calling for independence and control of internal security. As the Singapore military base was still necessary in Britain's strategic evaluation of the region against China and Indonesia, it must now be protected under a different arrangement.

Britain, therefore, took the Malaysia merger proposal out of the cupboard, gave it a dusting and put it on fast track. Lord Selkirk, the British High Commissioner, made it exceedingly clear that the merger of Singapore into Malaysia was a non-negotiable term of the new political entity.

As far as the Tunku in Malaya was concerned, he was not keen to have what he saw as "a left-wing and Chinese majority" Singapore. The British had to entice him by including the Borneo territories of present day Sabah and Sarawak in the Malaysia package.

As for Lee Kuan Yew under threat from the recent left-wing electoral victories, his hope was that with merger, the Tunku would arrest his left-wing opponents in Singapore for him. But the Tunku would not take that odium for Lee. Finally, Operation Coldstore of 2 February 1963 was a tripartite undertaking of the British, Malaya and Singapore that crippled the open democratic left-wing movement of Singapore.

As we see from here, the three parties involved in setting up Malaysia had no vision of forming a nation; they came together for political reasons of their own.

Once inside Malaysia, Lee Kuan Yew sought to replace Tan Siew Sin and the MCA as the Tunku's Chinese partner in the Alliance coalition. Clearly Lee was not against the communal politics of Malaysia in ideology or principle. However, when he failed to persuade the Tunku to let go of Tan Siew Sin, he then decided that he would enter the Malaysian general election of 1964 to prove to the Tunku that he commanded more Chinese support than the MCA even though he had promised the Tunku that he would not take part in that election coming so close on the heel of merger. Lee broke his word. To Lee's consternation, the PAP failed miserably in the 1964 general election, winning only one out of five seats contested. Lee was staring into a bleak and dim future in Malaysia!

At this juncture, it is timely to recall an earlier conversation Lee had with PBC Moore, then acting British High Commissioner in Singapore, in which he informed Moore that if he had no place in Malaysia, the odds for success of Malaysia would be nil.

Lord Selkirk, in his clairvoyance, had indicated that in such an eventuality, Lee Kuan Yew would resort to racial politics in Malaysia, and as intended and expected, UNMO would retaliate and communal sparks would fly. And thus was ignited the July 1964 rioting in Singapore.

It was in this unhappy state of affairs that in December 1964, the Tunku wrote to Lee, suggesting that they should discuss the possibility of constitutional rearrangement between the two territories that did not necessarily hive off Singapore. However had it not been for intervening events that were fast changing Britain's continuing need for the base in Singapore, the Tunku would have been powerless to propose any constitutional re-arrangement with Lee.

The first intervening event was that by October 1964, the Chinese had exploded its first atomic bomb. As a consequence, the Singapore military base's raison d'etre to contain China by nuclear deterrence was moot.

The second intervening event was the impending downfall of Sukarno. By December 1964, the British were rather confident that their machinations in Indonesia would be bearing fruit and that the end of Sukarno was round the corner. Even Sukarno himself had premonitions as he entitled his speech in January 1965 as "The year of living dangerously." Sukarno did not last out 1965.

In view of these two factors, the usefulness of the British military base in Singapore was rapidly diminishing; and the British permitted the Tunku and Lee to explore a new arrangement between Malaya and Singapore in the period around the end of 1964 and beginning of 1965.

At this stage, the new arrangement still envisaged defence and foreign affairs to remain in the hands of the Tunku with only some form of autonomy accorded to Singapore. However by July 1965, when it became obvious that Sukarno's fall was in the cards, the separation of Singapore from Malaysia – an option favoured by Lee Kuan Yew and Goh KengSwee – was raised in the talks between Razak and Goh.

To hasten the pace for separation, the PAP held the Malaysian Solidarity Convention in May 1965. It is to be noted that the left-wing parties in Malaya declined the invitation to participate in this so-called "Malaysian Solidarity." Masquerading under a purportedly neutral and inclusive slogan "Malaysia for Malaysians," the Convention took on an overtly anti-Malay line, resulting in communal tensions between Malays and Chinese. Thus, to prevent further communal violence, in August 1965, separation – as desired by Lee and Goh – became a reality. Yet Lee shed crocodile tears on television!

By happy co-incidence, as would innocently appear to British imperialist designs, Sukarno fell at the end of September 1965 in the incident known as G3OS (which I will not go into here.) Suffice to say any remaining reason for UK to hold on to the Singapore military base became invalid.

Malaysia had come into being – not because there was any genuine desire to build a nation out of the territories of Malaya, Singapore and the Borneo territories. Its raison d'etre was solely to protect the British military base in Singapore. Once the usefulness of the base was gone, UK packed up and left.

Unfortunately in the process, the PAP played the communal card to the hilt – whipping up both Chinese and Malay chauvinism – with its Malaysian Solidarity Conference and Malaysian Malaysia slogan. The result has been communal tension, on both sides of the causeway. Friendly fraternal relations gave way to hostility. Malaya and Singapore are much farther apart today than in 1962.

*   *   *

I would have ended my speech here but perhaps there is a chapter in my book on united front tactic that merits mention here.

I could have conveyed the impression that any united front tactic is wrong or undesirable, given my strong criticisms of the united front forged between the left-wing and PAP in Singapore in the late 1950s and early 60s.

This could not be further from the truth. I support Lmited front tactic as it is an essential means for a progressive political party to increase its membership and votes; or for that matter, for any progressive group to enlarge its influence.

A united front gives the stage to these progressive forces to reach out and educate a wider population with their pro-people programmes and galvanize them into action. Through a properly conducted united front, the progressive forces can grow from strength to strength.

My criticisms of Eu Chu Yip and The Plen are not over whether or not a united front was historically necessary at that stage in Singapore. My criticisms are based on how that united front was conducted. In fact, I do not consider The Plen's arrangement with Lee Kuan Yew to be a united front because it goes against the very principles of a united front.

A united front is formed by diverse parties based on a common platform. Should a party betray the common platform or attack or weaken another component party, the latter is entitled to protest and bring this internal struggle to the constituencies supporting the common platform. It is only in this manner that the people are educated to defend the common platform and distinguish between those genuinely serving the people and those who are opportunists within the united front

But the united front conducted by Eu and The Plen did not abide by these principles.

In 1959, when the PAP arrested student activists under the PPSO (equivalent of the ISA today), there were no protests from Eu or The Plen or the left-wing forces;

When Lee Kuan Yew did not release all political prisoners as he had promised he would should he win the elections of 1959, there were again no protests;

The left-wing called for the abolition of the PPSO; instead Lee Kuan Yew tightened the PPSO by abolishing the review boardand replacing it with a toothless advisory board – again no protest;

When Lee Kuan Yew prohibited Lim Chin Siong from speaking at the Hong Lim by elections in a blatant attempt to curtail Chin Siong's influence, there was again no protests;

The same occurred in 1961 when restrictive trade union laws were passed – again no protest.

This is not united front tactic but a wholesale selling out. The progressive forces of Singapore learnt it the hard way. Yet "once bitten twice shy" is not an option.

END

Related link: Book launch in Petaling Jaya on 2 April 2016
https://youtu.be/ZVn_9mtG9bU



自强不息 力争上游

2016年4月05日首版 Created on April 5, 2016
2016年4月10日改版 Last updated on April 10, 2016